A. The Plaintiff loaned to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) a total of KRW 285,00,000 per annum from March 12, 2018 to March 20, 2018, at 24% per annum, and on March 12, 2019 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

B. Around March 12, 2018, the Defendants signed and sealed D’s loan certificates prepared by D with respect to the instant loan to the Plaintiff as “sureties”.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s joint and several liability of the Defendants is asserted that the Defendants jointly and severally guaranteed the instant loan obligations of D, and the Defendants asserted that they merely guaranteed the loan obligations. Therefore, the Defendants signed and sealed the loan certificate as the guarantor. As seen earlier.

However, the following circumstances, which can be revealed by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in the statement No. 3-1 and No. 2 of the evidence No. 3-2, i.e., (i) even if a commercial activity is not performed, the company shall be deemed a merchant even if it does not engage in such commercial activity (Article 5(2) of the Commercial Act); (ii) the merchant's act is presumed to be engaged in the commercial activity; and (iii) if a guarantor exists, the principal obligor and the guarantor are jointly and severally liable (Article 57(2) of the Commercial Act); (iv) the Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the debt of this case which are considered as a merchant's commercial activity (Article 57(2) of the Commercial Act); and (ii) the Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the debt of this case that the Defendant Company sent to the Plaintiff on February 18, 2019. In light of the fact that the Defendants are also deemed to have jointly and severally liable for the debt of this case.